There’s probably no test for whether a simple model of large-scale social organization is “correct”. It pretty much can’t be complete, but it may have useful elements embedded in it.
Personally, I think this VASTLY underplays the role of culture and willingness to kill/die for a cause. “consent” is a continuum, not a binary. The level needed not to revolt is much lower than the level needed to be a productive member of a regime you don’t fully support. Which is different from voting or canvassing, which is different from actually working directly for the jerks. On the other side, the level of commitment to a particular revolutionary plan can vary quite widely while still destabilizing the power.
Willingness to kill can be increased by proper use of blackmail. For example, when communist countries needed to crush a civilian rebellion, they sometimes sent two lines of soldiers: the soldiers in the first line were supposed to kill the civilians, and the soldiers in the second line were supposed to kill those soldiers in the first line who refused to kill the civilians. Suddenly, the soldiers in the first line were quite willing to do whatever they were told to.
Sure—that’s the “slash die” part of things. Culture is always contextual, and it’s very hard to predict how members of a group will react to very new circumstances. Whether members in the first line of soldiers consider it sufficiently honorable (insert your preferred utility or psychological analog as desired) to die rather than killing is quite contingent.
There’s probably no test for whether a simple model of large-scale social organization is “correct”. It pretty much can’t be complete, but it may have useful elements embedded in it.
Personally, I think this VASTLY underplays the role of culture and willingness to kill/die for a cause. “consent” is a continuum, not a binary. The level needed not to revolt is much lower than the level needed to be a productive member of a regime you don’t fully support. Which is different from voting or canvassing, which is different from actually working directly for the jerks. On the other side, the level of commitment to a particular revolutionary plan can vary quite widely while still destabilizing the power.
Willingness to kill can be increased by proper use of blackmail. For example, when communist countries needed to crush a civilian rebellion, they sometimes sent two lines of soldiers: the soldiers in the first line were supposed to kill the civilians, and the soldiers in the second line were supposed to kill those soldiers in the first line who refused to kill the civilians. Suddenly, the soldiers in the first line were quite willing to do whatever they were told to.
Sure—that’s the “slash die” part of things. Culture is always contextual, and it’s very hard to predict how members of a group will react to very new circumstances. Whether members in the first line of soldiers consider it sufficiently honorable (insert your preferred utility or psychological analog as desired) to die rather than killing is quite contingent.